This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Quote
while i agree that there may be times when war has sadly served a purpose, it has not been a solution. you confuse the two. there would never have been a resolution to any of the wars you cite without dialogue and diplomacy in conjunction and aftermath.
sometimes war is seemingly unavoidable, but that does not make it a solution. as for your WWII analogy - do more reading - we did not take the situation seriously and again had our own ends in mind before we realized exactly where the entire situation was headed. it was our stance that we didn\'t want to get involved.
in this particular case, war is steadfastly not the answer because there was no legitimate threat to anyone, it was a manufactured threat. you want to believe what you want to believe, that\'s fine.
as for the rest - no, you don\'t really care to register what has been said so of course you\'re going to dismissively ignore what others are saying as not logically supporting their argument.
Quoteyou need to do some serious reading...
how on earth anyone can think that war is a solution is beyond me. the solutions are actual dialogues and learning to compromise. the solutions are geniune diplomacy efforts rather than the nonsense that has been going on. i\'m sorry but you seem to want me to concede something or come over to your way of thinking or else \'prove\' my way is right - self examination of your own line of thought and what solutions lie within your suggestions would be more fruitful for you.
Quotethat\'s a long stream of over simplicification and rationalization that i cannot subscribe to. war is not the solution to any of the issues you\'ve skimmed over. it is doing nothing to resolve any of the issues and it is simply serving to keep the public in those places beholden to one faction or another; and making a small group of people very wealthy.I\'m not asking you to subscribe to anything, over simplification is saying that war isn\'t the answer to any of the problems. What are the solutions you would seek to solve the problems? What did I say that was over simplified? I gave some very relevant pespective to the entire picture. Who is getting wealthy?
QuoteI read an article recently I believe it was in Time Magazine that stated, and I am paraphrasing here, that the psychology of war has proven time and time again (war after war) that most crimes that are committed during war times are a direct result of a leader encouraging, directly or indirectly, the inappropriate behavior essentially creating a mob like atmosphere.
I agree it would be nice to hear some more positive stories and not just handing out candy bars.
I watched a television program several years ago that claimed Iraq may have been better off under Saddam's rule. Woman were not as objectified, children were getting a western school education, and they did not have as much religious turmoil as they do now, but all this was a direct result of the fact that if you didn't do it Saddam's way he killed you, besides that one little problem...
While all our heads have been turned to Israel, Iraq is currently on the brink of complete melt down. When will we ever learn? It makes me wonder if we had gone after Bin Lauden and won on that battle front wouldn't that have sent a stronger message to terrorist? And in hind sight perhaps Israel, Iran, Iraq, Hizballah, Hamas, etc., etc. may all now be playing a little nicer.
Quote"they were under orders to "kill all military age males," according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press." - This concerns me more than anything else in the article. Who knows what really happened, for the sake of all the lives involved, soldier and citizen, I hope they come to the truth. But to think that our soldiers are encouraged to "kill all military age males" is sickening.
Quotetrying to toss my words at me doesn\'t really work. you can\'t have it both ways - you asked me if i was conceding that they did have WMD when we invaded and no i do not.
i never said they didn\'t use wheapons, and i certainly did say that we sold them wheapons, but did they have what we accused them of having to precipitate our invasion? no they did not, and i never said that they did.
if you want to discuss something, discuss it, rather than trying to undermine the person in the discussion. your points should speak for themselves, rather than trying to twist someone else\'s words to be what they are not.
my point in remarking that the US sold many of the wheapons that Iraq used against others is that for us to get all high and holier than thou about their use is idiotic when we supplied them.
Quotedarlin\' we love differing points of view, but i have to remind you - the US sold Sadam many of those wheapons, and were tight buds with him, and aided in keeping him in power. we remember a lot of things, and are wise enough to know that much of what the government tells us is the lie du jour based on their agenda at the moment.
Quotedarlin\' we love differing points of view, but i have to remind you - the US sold Sadam many of those wheapons, and were tight buds with him, and aided in keeping him in power. we remember a lot of things, and are wise enough to know that much of what the government tells us is the lie du jour based on their agenda at the moment.
QuoteI have to report this one even though it has nothing to do with pop corn...but I love the numbers game.
36% -- Percentage of Americans surveyed last year who said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003.
50% -- Percentage of Americans surveyed this year who said that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. invaded in 2003.
What are we actually getting dumber?!
Quote8,591 Number of potential terrorist targets in Indiana - including the Amish Country Popcorn Factory
Quotenope. i was answering buswolley and you must realize that because your first statement was that you didn\'t understand the "person-to-person remark" - of course you didn\'t because it wasn\'t directed to your remarks it was directed to buswolley. as was most of what i said, not all, but nearly all.
you\'re out for an argument not a discussion, so i\'m just going to have to let you have your little steam vent on your own.
Quotenot everything was a response to your post - if you read Buswolley\'s you\'d see that much or most of it was actually directed toward that post and not your own.
i agree with the notion that lobbyists are a part of the system now and would likely continue to be, and there are differnt types of lobbyists, frankly, so i don\'t see that they should all be done away with. however, having said that, i do find the notion that we are wedded forever to a system created two hundred years ago because of an inability to provide for an individual vote for several reasons that were legitimate 200 years ago and are now obsolete.
as you said, things change, and the electoral system in this country is one thing that should change to reflect the best interests of the populace.
Quotewhere why and how do you equate doing away with the electoral college with losing the state counts? votes would still be gathered and noted within the town/city/borough and state they are cast.
i\'m sorry but to me it makes no sense to have Wyoming have the same weight as California or New York - they don\'t have the same population, don\'t provide the same level of GNP, don\'t use the same number of tax dollars - giving them equal weight makes no sense at all. each state should have the weight of their actual population.
the 2004 vote was a sorry excuse for a vote and the actual winner is unknown - far too much tinkering went on. the 2000 vote is likely have been nearly as bad though it\'s hard to tell. all in all - i don\'t frankly believe that Bush was ever truly elected, because we cannot trust the results that put him in office. not to mention that the supreme court decided the 2000 election in the end, not the voters.
it makes absolutely no sense to perpetuate the electoral college, i\'m sorry - your arguments don\'t sway my view in the least. especially that one about them trying to connect person to person. the electoral college actually does discourage voters - please understand that. everyone i have talked to has said it is discouraging because they basically believe that their vote does not count. they do it because the feel it is their duty (although some in fact say this is why they do not vote).
it does not encourage candidates to do more person to person campaigning - it encourages candidates to try and sway the delegates, not the people on the street. it is the province of the lobbyists.
Quote
1. The Electoral College gives disproportionate weight to the votes of citizens of small states. For example, a vote by a resident of Wyoming counts about four times more--electorally--than a vote by a California resident.
2. Most Americans believe that the person who receives the most votes should become president. Direct election is seen as more consistent with democratic principles than is the Electoral College system.
3. If presidents were elected by direct popular vote, they would wage a campaign and advertise all across the nation, rather than (as they do in the Electoral College system) concentrating almost all of their time and effort in a handful of battleground states. The Electoral College system encourages candidates to pander to the interests of voters in a few closely contested states.
4. When the winner of the Electoral College is not the candidate who received the most votes of the people, the new president will face questions about his legitimacy.
QuoteLOL!!! i could live on pizza. well... and red wine.
it\'s funny how often i was told i was naive for thinking that abolishing the electoral college would be feasible. the fact is to me NOT abolishing it is unfeasible. it is the very reason we have such shitty voter turn out, but of course, there are many in the places of power who very much want us to have shitty voter turn out - and to keep the common man from determining his own fate. that whole \'we know what\'s best for you so you just keep tilling the soil and shoeing the horses, we\'ll take care of the hard work of government\' mentality.